[2018] KEELRC 2240 (KLR)
The court held that the gross pay at the time of termination, specifically Kshs. 17,233.15, which includes basic pay and house allowance but excludes other allowances, is the correct base figure for computing the nine months' compensation awarded to the claimant. The court further emphasized that it is functus...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 2240 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Samson Omechi Ongera; Respondent: Tusker Mattresses Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 637 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Cause / Post Judgment Ruling on Computation of Award
- Outcome
- Application for clarification allowed to the extent of specifying the base salary for computation; no variation of the original judgment.
- Judges
- DI Wasike
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Compensation Computation, Gross Salary Definition
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Samson Omechi Ongera
Claimant
Tusker Mattresses Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Cause / Post Judgment Ruling on Computation of Award
Legal Issues
- 1 What constitutes the correct base figure of salary for computing the nine months' compensation awarded to the claimant.
- 2 Whether the court can entertain new issues after delivering its judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the gross pay at the time of termination, specifically Kshs. 17,233.15, which includes basic pay and house allowance but excludes other allowances, is the correct base figure for computing the nine months' compensation awarded to the claimant. The court further emphasized that it is functus officio after delivering its judgment and cannot entertain new issues unless the strict requirements for review or setting aside under rule 33 are met. The compensation is also subject to statutory deductions and taxes as a matter of law.
Court Disposition
Application for clarification allowed to the extent of specifying the base salary for computation; no variation of the original judgment.
Orders
- The claimant's gross pay of Kshs. 17,233.15 as at the time of termination shall form the basis for computing the nine months' salary compensation awarded by the court.
- The compensation is subject to statutory deductions and taxes.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF
KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 637 OF 2014
SAMSON OMECHI ONGERA……………..………….….…..CLAIMANT
VERSUS
TUSKER MATTRESSES LIMITED……...…..…………..RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The dispute which triggered the application dated 31st July 2017 seem to be over what constitutes the base figure of salary to be used in computing the 9 month salary awarded to the claimant by the judgement of the court delivered on 17th February 2017. The court once delivers its judgment became functus officio and can only review or set aside the judgement if parameters set out under rule 33 of the court rules are satisfied. The court cannot at this point entertain new issues.
2. Under section 49(1) (c) where the court finds that an employee has been unfairly terminated the court can award up to twelve month’s salary as compensation based on gross monthly salary of such employee. Gross monthly pay comprises of basic pay together with house allowance but does not include other work dependent allowances such as bonus or car allowance and overtime. The payment as a matter of law is subject to statutory deductions and taxes.
3. The claimants gross pay as at the time of termination of his service was Kshs.17,233. 15. This should therefore form the basis for computing the nine months salary compensation awarded by the court.
4. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 2nd day of March 2018
Abuodha J. N.
Judge
Delivered at Nairobi this 2nd day of March 2018
In the presence of:-
……………………………. for the claimant
……………………….…... for the Respondent
Abuodha J. N.
Judge